As to all the discussion about MMO

[Bayman]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Bayman
Hi, new member here, long time MMO user, great product that saved me tons of dollars over the 30 years I used it. Why is there such hostility here toward the product? Proof comes in many forms, although it is tough to prove to people opposed to opinions, and testimony. I compile my own data from tinkering.

Great site, thanks for letting me join.

Bayman. There are only a few "hostile" people here, very few in fact. You'll be able to pick them out pretty easy, still its a great site to be a part of. I'm glad to see you've had positive experiences with MMO if you have some time care to share them? Some of us are interested.


Thanks DP for the welcome. I did some side work for friends on cars for extra cash over the years, mostly work on small block chevy's. I'm not one to tear an engine apart for no reason. So when I hear a ticking lifter its break out the MMO, quiets those puppies down big time, and they stay quiet unless the cam is shot, or the lifter is broken, I ran into that maybe 5 or 6 times in 30 years. And I've worked on alot of engines. I've changed out alot of valve cover gaskets, oil pans and pumps, etc too, and saw lots of sludge and treated it with MMO, works super for that too. I'll pop a VC once in a while to be sure. It works slow but works. It helped a few oil burners, but that depends on what causes them to burn oil. It ain't fixing stem seals, broken rings or bad valve guides. But if its sticking rings it cleans them up too, just give it time. I'll use it once a year for an annual cleaning, and addit to gas always. Keeps my carb working real good.

Don't ask me for pictures I don't have them. I won't touch the mpg fight either, if I told ya my mpg was better I'd be in for a fight with someone. HA HA

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
It was only a tempory fix for a lifter tick on my last car.

Can say nothing about fuel pump whine or injector noise as that has never been a problem.

As for starting fine in cold weather, running great, or blowing up or seizing. None of that was a problem when the only cars that I had were 20 year old hand me downs or $400 beaters. {Such as a 1964 Le Sabre or a 1968 Nova.)

And it certainly isn't a problem with the much newer, barely driven, cars I've had in recent years.

So, why would I want to add MMO to oil? Are current oil formulations that bad that they need help? Because other do it?


Temp fix of the lifter? Probably a bad lifter or cam, it happens. I'd stay clear of MMO if I were you, you're so against the product even if it did work for you, you probably wouldn't accept it.

Remember there is no such thing as a mechanic in a can.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: Bamboooo
4 out of 5 dentists recommend Crest.

There you go, Trojan. There's a new one for you to use your twisted logic and argue.


Sad. Just sad.

Wasn't aware that refusing to accept claims on nothing more than they get posted was twisted. But I can see where the unrepentant dogmatics do.

We're not dealing with unrepentant dogmatism.

I also am pretty convinced that we're not dealing with an utter failure of critical thinking, either. I think you and I may have horribly misrepresented some of our fellow BITOGers on that score, and we may have to apologize.

I think we're just dealing with a different set of criteria for what constitutes critical evaluation. Our counterparts in this discussion seem to look for consensus, authoritativeness (e.g. when "respected" members post), "common sense" intuition, and whether there are any obvious signs of fraud. Any science-literate person knows why that's not the best way to go about separating fact from fiction. However, labeling it as a total failure of critical thinking, as you and I both have done, is wrong. It's actually a good start in that it goes at least one step beyond taking things at face value, and failing to recognize that has severely undermined our credibility. The real problems with that approach are that it doesn't take the analysis far enough and doesn't apply the best available criteria. In other words, it's about using the wrong tools, not completely failing to do the job.

Still, as mild as that may seem, trying to convince someone of that ultimately constitutes offering to shatter and rebuild the very foundation of their rationality. This is especially true since those "common sense" rules tend to work at least moderately well in the world at large. Unless both parties are willing to make that change, it's never going to happen. We would do well to understand that any attempt to force it on them in any way -- whether directly or through indignation or ridicule -- essentially constitutes hostility, and anyone would be entirely justified in reacting accordingly. I think a lot about how this thread has gone can be understood in those terms.

Now, don't get me wrong; I don't for one second think this means we should shy away from pushing for evidence and verifiability. Nor do I think all of the backlash against us was necessarily reasonable and justified. I just think that if we truly want to succeed, we have to be very, very careful. In that respect, we have failed here, at least to some extent. We should try to do better next time.

 

[demarpaint]

d00df00d- Two simple questions: Have you ever used anything on a recommendation w/o having facts, data, proof that the product was good? Ever? Ever recommend a product because it worked well for you? Anything at all? Just wondering, and I'm not looking for another battle.

 

[d00df00d]

Yes, and yes. That's part of how I know to try not to do those things.

 

[demarpaint]

LOL-I see so you never had a good experience taking a recommendation from someone? Or were never amped on something that was good that you tried and wanted to share to help someone else?

I do understand that sometimes no good deed goes unpunished.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: Bamboooo
4 out of 5 dentists recommend Crest.

There you go, Trojan. There's a new one for you to use your twisted logic and argue.


Sad. Just sad.

Wasn't aware that refusing to accept claims on nothing more than they get posted was twisted. But I can see where the unrepentant dogmatics do.

We're not dealing with unrepentant dogmatism.

I also am pretty convinced that we're not dealing with an utter failure of critical thinking, either. I think you and I may have horribly misrepresented some of our fellow BITOGers on that score, and we may have to apologize.

I think we're just dealing with a different set of criteria for what constitutes critical evaluation. Our counterparts in this discussion seem to look for consensus, authoritativeness (e.g. when "respected" members post), "common sense" intuition, and whether there are any obvious signs of fraud. Any science-literate person knows why that's not the best way to go about separating fact from fiction. However, labeling it as a total failure of critical thinking, as you and I both have done, is wrong. It's actually a good start in that it goes at least one step beyond taking things at face value, and failing to recognize that has severely undermined our credibility. The real problems with that approach are that it doesn't take the analysis far enough and doesn't apply the best available criteria. In other words, it's about using the wrong tools, not completely failing to do the job.

Still, as mild as that may seem, trying to convince someone of that ultimately constitutes offering to shatter and rebuild the very foundation of their rationality. This is especially true since those "common sense" rules tend to work at least moderately well in the world at large. Unless both parties are willing to make that change, it's never going to happen. We would do well to understand that any attempt to force it on them in any way -- whether directly or through indignation or ridicule -- essentially constitutes hostility, and anyone would be entirely justified in reacting accordingly. I think a lot about how this thread has gone can be understood in those terms.

Now, don't get me wrong; I don't for one second think this means we should shy away from pushing for evidence and verifiability. Nor do I think all of the backlash against us was necessarily reasonable and justified. I just think that if we truly want to succeed, we have to be very, very careful. In that respect, we have failed here, at least to some extent. We should try to do better next time.


We should. We can, do better.

But I am at this moment at a loss of how to accomplish that.

Especially in light of "expensive lab tests", or "haters", or "twisted logic." Or "warnings" because a post isn't accepted on its face.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
We should. We can, do better.

But I am at this moment at a loss of how to accomplish that.



Here's a start, see if you can get the mods to open up a new section for data, tests, etc., then start posting data, pictures, and test results.

 

[AlienBug]

It just seems MMO is held to a far higher standard than any other product on BITOG.

Does anyone pounce when posters report that changing oil brands made their engine "feel" smoother. Or that it "seems" to have quieted the lifters?

Or that changing brands of gas made the car "feel" peppier?

Or how about the universally unchallenged "The manufacturer recommends XX,XXX mile oil changes, but I don't 'feel' comfortable with that."

Or "the manufacturer recommends 5-20 oil, but I 'feel' that's just for CAFE...

All of those comments are commonplace on BITOG and none result in endless demands for notarized, peer reviewed scientific studies.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
LOL-I see so you never had a good experience taking a recommendation from someone? Or were never amped on something that was good that you tried and wanted to share to help someone else?

Oh, quite a bit.

What I realized is that, when I rely on intuition and hearsay, I was just about as likely to have (or lead someone to) a good experience as a bad one. In other words, it's not that I had no success; it's that the odds of success were not much better than rolling the dice. On the other hand, when I relied on verifiable evidence, or took advice from someone who was, my success rate was pretty darn good.

This was even more true when I went to grad school and participated in a venture that actually sought to push the borders of human knowledge (i.e. a science lab). There, I learned how and why evidence-based pursuits were and are responsible for just about every significant advancement our species has made, and why intuition and hearsay don't get you very far if you're doing anything serious.

So, no, it's not that I've been burned every time I tried to do what you do. Not at all. It's that I've learned -- not thought of, not discovered, but learned through experience and from others -- something that, as far as I can tell, is a better way to figure things out.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: AlienBug
Does anyone pounce when posters report that changing oil brands made their engine "feel" smoother. Or that it "seems" to have quieted the lifters?

Or that changing brands of gas made the car "feel" peppier?

Or how about the universally unchallenged "The manufacturer recommends XX,XXX mile oil changes, but I don't 'feel' comfortable with that."

Or "the manufacturer recommends 5-20 oil, but I 'feel' that's just for CAFE...

Check, check, check, and check.


Originally Posted By: AlienBug
All of those comments are commonplace on BITOG and none result in endless demands for notarized, peer reviewed scientific studies.

Sure they do.

But if it seems unbalanced, there are a few possible reasons:

1. You're not looking in those other threads as much.

2. People simply don't think it'll be worthwhile to ask for evidence because the OP seems like the kind of person who won't even understand what that means.
3. The people making the evidence-free claims don't try to defend those claims or accuse their critics of being haters/chauvinists/etc.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: AlienBug
It just seems MMO is held to a far higher standard than any other product on BITOG.

Does anyone pounce when posters report that changing oil brands made their engine "feel" smoother. Or that it "seems" to have quieted the lifters?

Or that changing brands of gas made the car "feel" peppier?

Or how about the universally unchallenged "The manufacturer recommends XX,XXX mile oil changes, but I don't 'feel' comfortable with that."

Or "the manufacturer recommends 5-20 oil, but I 'feel' that's just for CAFE...

All of those comments are commonplace on BITOG and none result in endless demands for notarized, peer reviewed scientific studies.


I think you're on to something. There are some heated discussions, but as far as the pouncing goes, MMO seems to get pounced with much more intensity lately. And from the same few people.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
LOL-I see so you never had a good experience taking a recommendation from someone? Or were never amped on something that was good that you tried and wanted to share to help someone else?

Oh, quite a bit.

What I realized is that, when I rely on intuition and hearsay, I was just about as likely to have (or lead someone to) a good experience as a bad one. In other words, it's not that I had no success; it's that the odds of success were not much better than rolling the dice. On the other hand, when I relied on verifiable evidence, or took advice from someone who was, my success rate was pretty darn good.

This was even more true when I went to grad school and participated in a venture that actually sought to push the borders of human knowledge (i.e. a science lab). There, I learned how and why evidence-based pursuits were and are responsible for just about every significant advancement our species has made, and why intuition and hearsay don't get you very far if you're doing anything serious.

So, no, it's not that I've been burned every time I tried to do what you do. Not at all. It's that I've learned -- not thought of, not discovered, but learned through experience and from others -- something that, as far as I can tell, is a better way to figure things out.


That's too bad. As you get older you'll get wiser and build on that intuition. My intuition is very good, and my ability to read people is pretty darn good too. It made me a lot of money in sales, saved me a ton of money over the years, and helped a lot of people too. Don't get me wrong I got burnt a few times, but the funny thing is I only got burnt when I second guessed myself. I complied data when available, listened to testimony, and listened to those wiser than me.

Case in point where second guessing cost me a few $$ was with a popular additive here on Bitog, but I won't cry over spilled milk. In fact is it further taught me not to second guess myself, so it was money well spent.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: AlienBug
It just seems MMO is held to a far higher standard than any other product on BITOG.


More like holding it to the same standard as say, bitron, duralube, synlube, arx, etc.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
That's too bad. As you get older you'll get wiser and build on that intuition. My intuition is very good, and my ability to read people is pretty darn good too. It made me a lot of money in sales, saved me a ton of money over the years, and helped a lot of people too. Don't get me wrong I got burnt a few times, but the funny thing is I only got burnt when I second guessed myself. I complied data when available, listened to testimony, and listened to those wiser than me.

Case in point where second guessing cost me a few $$ was with a popular additive here on Bitog, but I won't cry over spilled milk. In fact is it further taught me not to second guess myself, so it was money well spent.

The irony here is that, if you used nothing but your intuitions to come to this conclusion, you have no way to know whether it's really true or simply the product of a series of cognitive biases. But I have a feeling that's getting a bit too esoteric here. Let me know if you'd actually like to hear more.

Suffice it to say that when I talked about relying on intuition and hearsay in contrast to relying on verifiable evidence, I was talking about relying on intuition and hearsay alone vs. taking evidence into account. I'll grant that I would have done well to make that explicit; I simply assumed it was clear from the context. I hope this clears something up, and that you're not seriously suggesting that you feel you're better off without evidence than with it.

 

[demarpaint]

^^We still are lacking the evidence, so what else is left? I was the person suggesting another section be added for the "evidence". I think the difference between us is, I'm willing to take a shot w/o evidence, and have good very good intuition. [This isn't an attack against you, just a point I'm making.] I'm also probably old enough to be your father. Life's experiences count for something too especially when there is no evidence.

Getting back to MMO there are no cogitative bias's when seeing, and hearing have time and time showed me the product worked. Yes I can shut an engine off and coast downhill to increase mpg, but I'm not the person making the mpg claims. I think we put that to rest already. Then if you want a bit of evidence the few UOA reports with MMO added to the oil were good. But we can rip that apart if we wanted too couldn't we?

Wow its getting late, I have to run.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
^^We still are lacking the evidence, so what else is left? I was the person suggesting another section be added for the "evidence". I think the difference between us is, I'm willing to take a shot w/o evidence, and have good very good intuition. [This isn't an attack against you, just a point I'm making.]

You think I'm unwilling to make a move without evidence? I take that as a compliment.

But while I appreciate your attempt at conciliation, I think the evidence (in another turn of delicious irony) suggests that the difference between us runs a bit deeper than that.


Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I'm also probably old enough to be your father. Life's experiences count for something too especially when there is no evidence.

Life experiences ARE evidence.

And by the way, for someone claiming such an advantage in maturity, you seem quite eager to presume as to details of my personal life. You also do not seem to have outgrown the impulse to make arguments from authority. I guess this is another instance in which the evidence does not support the claim.


Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Getting back to MMO

...and then complaining that people bash it...


Originally Posted By: demarpaint
there are no cogitative bias's when seeing, and hearing have time and time showed me the product worked.

Probably going to have to let this one rest. I don't have the time or energy these days to offer a crash course in cognitive psychology. I will simply suggest that, if the above comment accurately reflects your understanding of the process of observing phenomena, you have a lot to learn about the human mind.

 

[Mystic]

I was done with this discussion since it was going in circles but I have kept reading the posts and I have to jump back it.

I get the impression ------, corect me if I am wrong, that you feel you have superior reasoning ability compared to the average person here at bitgo. Well, I have 5 years of college and over 31 years of employment experience myself. I am going to talk in plain, simple English.

I am going to give three examples. A long time ago country people were telling scientists that they observed rocks falling from the sky. The scientists laughed and ignored what these people told them. Then the scientists discovered meteorites. Rocks really did fall from the sky and the country people were right. Of course nobody gave the country people credit but now it was okay to discuss meteorites because the scientists had discovered them.

Example two is the movement of the continents on the surface of the Earth. Several people suggested long ago that perhaps the continents had once been together and that the continents might be moving about on the surface of the Earth. The overwhelming majority of scientists refused to even consider this idea. Well today most scientists accept the theory of continental drift.

Example three concerns UFOs. At this point I don't care what you think about UFOs. That is not important. There is another point I am going to try to make here. I saw a UFO but that is not important to this discussion either. There are a group of people who attempt to disprove and debunk any UFO sightings that come about. There was a very famous UFO event at Bentwaters in England. The debunkers claimed that the UFO was nothing but a light from a lighthouse and considered it solved. Well, people who ACTUALLY DID AN ONSITE INVESTIGATION, found out that since the construction of the lighthouse a metal plate had been installed that prevented the light from being seen from the land. The people who built the lighthouse wanted the light to be visible to ships, of course. The debunkers had not actually done any field research, because otherwise they would have been able to discover the metal plate.

Several people have come forward during this discussion and stated that MMO benefited them in some way. Many discussed lifter noise reduction they had noticed and some talked about the interior of an engine appearing to have become cleaner. This included a person here who actually disassembled engines. Is this not evidence? Unless our required standard is a lab test, is it not evidence what these people are saying? Remember the country people who told the scientists about rocks falling from the sky? Even Trajan said something about a 'temporary' reduction in lifter noise.

I have a suggestion for you -------. You and Trajan seem to be convinced that either MMO does not work or else a higher standard of proof is required. Well, it is time for some 'field evidence!' Since you and Trajan should known what this higher standard of proof is, I suggest that you and Trajan do some testing that will prove once and for all that either MMO does not work, or it does. It does not appear that the statements of people here at bitgo are good enough for you. You two keep bringing up the need for a higher standard of proof.

I personally do not automatically assume that people are lying unless I have some EVIDENCE that they are lying. A good investigator listens to what people have to say and makes conclusions BASED ON THE EVIDENCE! Well, several people have stated that they obtained some benefit from using MMO. A man even disassembled engines and observed that there seemed to have been some cleaning. We are not talking about just one person. We are talking about several people. It seems to me that unless we assume all of these people are mistaken or not telling the truth, we have to realize that several people are saying the same thing. We have to consider what people are saying and not ASSUME they are mistaken. If country people keep coming to us and telling us rocks are falling from the sky, maybe instead of ASSUMING they are wrong, we need to do some field research. Is not science advanced by research, and not assumptions?

 

[keesue]

Cognitive psychology indeed...

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: Mystic

I have a suggestion for you ------.

I personally do not automatically assume that people are lying unless I have some EVIDENCE that they are lying. A good investigator listens to what people have to say and makes conclusions BASED ON THE EVIDENCE!


Ah, insults... The last refuge of one who never really had any ground to stand on.

And evidence has been sadly lacking in MMO land. You yourself compared this to a court of law. And in a court of law, anecdotes have to withstand rigorous cross examination.

And resorting to insults, or complaining about the very fact that people wish to question said anecdotes, shows they can't.

Funny how you neglect to state you don't automatically assume that people are telling the truth. Of course, since there is no *evidence*, how could you.